Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Peter O'Gorman wrote on Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 08:40:08AM CET: >> Peter O'Gorman wrote: >>> Ralf has already checked in a workaround for gcj being unable to create >>> objects/executables. I guess I will add to that so it tests that an >>> executable created by the compiler will actually run. >> Ok? > > Yes, provided that you've tested it ... > >> + AT_CHECK([./foo1$(EXEEXT) || exit 77],[],[ignore],[ignore]) >> + rm -f foo1.o foo1.obj foo1$(EXEEXT) > > ... after eliminating those syntax errors, $EXEEXT instead of $(EXEEXT).
Well that makes me feel silly :) Thanks. I tested that it ran the test on GNU/linux with GCJ=gcj and skipped when I set GCJ to 'gcj -L/home/pogma/lib -lzero' without /home/pogma/lib in the dynamic linker's search path. Peter -- Peter O'Gorman http://pogma.com
